Chapter 13
:1-8 David starts to bring the ark to Zion from Kirjath Jearim
:9-10 Uzzah struck dead for touching the ark
:13-14 The ark is left in the house of Obed Edom the Gittite

We see David's driving ambition was to bring the ark to Zion. It is the first thing spoken of when he is in Jerusalem.

Chapter 14
:1-2 Hiram sends materials to David to build David's house
:3-7 David's wives taken in Jerusalem and their children
:8-17 The Philistines attack David because he has been anointed king in Jerusalem

David's position as king is consolidated. He is recognised by Hiram of Tyre and defeats the Philistines - Israel's long time enemies all the days of Saul.

ch 13 - Whilst the record of the bringing of the ark to Zion focuses on David's action we should remember that David sought the involvement of the whole of the nation. Look at the extent (13:5). Not only was it David's desire but he wanted the whole nation to be involved and understand the significance of it all.

14:10, 14 We may well have thought it was obvious that David should have defended himself against the Philistines - but even though David may well have drawn that conclusion n both occasions he seeks God's mind on the matter. This shows how David had God's will at the centre of his thinking.

13:3 So even though the ark was in the territory of Israel and under Israelite control the ark was never used in the days of Saul! Again this gives some indication of the Godless nature of Saul's kingdom under his Godless rulership.

14:12 In commanding the people to burn the idols with fire Davis was following the instruction of Deut 7:5.

13:9,10,14 The Kohathites were the branch of the Levites charged with transporting holy things.  However, they were not to touch any holy thing, otherwise they would die (Num 4:15).  Uzzah was a Levite who should have known this.  He made the mistake (albeit out of a sense of preservation) to steady the ark and paid the price.  The Philistines had been handling the ark without any similar penalty.  This underscores the maxim that knowledge brings responsibility. 

After the unfortunate incident of Uzzah, the responsibility for the ark's care was given to Obed-Edom the Gittite (1Chron 26:1,4).  A Gittite was an inhabitant of Gath, the Philistine city (Goliath was a Gittite 1Sam 17:4; 1Chron 20:5).  However, there were several places in Israel which were known by the suffix Gath. Obed-Edom is believed to have come from Gath-Rimmon.  He was a Levite who was later mentioned as one of the temple gatekeepers and harpists (1Chron 15:18,21).

No matter how righteous the cause, it’s the way it is executed which matters. I think that’s the lesson of the death of Uzza.

1Chron 13:9-10 - A lesson of Uzzah is we must be careful to worship correctly. Num 4:15 - God had warned they must not touch the holy things or they will die.  Hos 4:6 - says, my people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. Rom 10:2 - warns about a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. John 4:24 - completes the picture stating that we must worship him in spirit and in truth. It's not enough to just have truth, the spirit of having a loving caring Christ like attitude must also be present.

13:11-12  David’s displeasure and fear of God would indicate that david did not expect there to be any adverse consequences from carrying the ark on a cart – does this mean that he did not know what the law required or that the priests did not know either?

14:9  Ironically ‘Rephaim’ means ‘giants’ so the Philistines – from whence came Goliath the giant, fought with David in the valley of the giants.

14:11  reads as if Hiram took the initiative in sending to David. An indication of the esteem in which David was held by other kings in the region. In fact we learn – 1Kin 5:1 that Hiram was always ‘a lover of David’

13:2 Notice that whilst |David consults with the ‘congregation’ seeking their approval for his plan to bring the ark to Zion he emphasized to them that the decision had to be according to God’s will. In this Rehoboam contrasts with David markedly when he consulted the judgement of the old and young men and did not seem to take account of God’s view. 1Kin 8:5-8

14:15 Mulberry trees are found in Israel today but were not there in Old Testament times.  It is uncertain which kind of tree is described here.  Marginal notes included: Baca; weeping; balsam. The Baca, similar to the balsam, is grown near Mecca, but is not known in Israel.  Weeping probably refers to gum resin oozing from the tree. 

13:5 Shihor of Egypt (KJV) must refer to the south-western boundary of Israel which was the Brook of Egypt (Wady el-'Arish).  Some have suggested that Shihor of Egypt means the Nile of Egypt (ESV).  But, this does not make sense.  David assembled Israel from the south to the north.  The territory that Israel occupied did not include the Sinai Peninsula, as this was not part of the Promised Land.

14:4-7 There are thirteen children mentioned here.  In the Septuagint, there are twenty-four listed.

14:15 The KJV has mulberry trees (Heb. baka), while the ESV has balsam. The tree in question is more likely to be a balsam popular (genus: populous, section: tacamahaca).  In the spring, this tree produces a sticky gum on its buds.  Baka means weeping, which probably refers to the sticky gum that flows in the spring.

Chapter 13 and 15 ought to be adjacent because they cover the restoration of the Ark to Israel. But capter 14 is in the middle. Strange. The chapter shows how David's reign was established (14:1-7), building himself a physical house and also a household. This symbol of David's stability was interpreted as a threat by the Philistines who immediatly set out to crush their former ally (14:8). We are then told of how David overcame the Philistines, not with the Ark as Israel had tried to do before (1Sam 4:3), but through simple prayer (v10 and v14).

The point that is being made loud and clear to us is that God is near to His people, no matter where they are. This knowledge had been lost by Eli and his sons and regained by David under the tutelage of Samuel. So Israel would have God in their midst whether they had an Ark, a temple, a tabernacle or not, as long as they Loved Him. And so with us. We should not confuse the trappings of organised worship from the real place where worship happens... namely in our heart with prayers and meditation. This is why chapter 14 is inserted; so that we understand it was not the Ark that saved David and established him as king, but God.

Vs.3,4,12,14 The prophecy against Tyre came true by the hand of Alexander the Great in 312 BC, over two hundred years after Ezekiel's words. 

What is remarkable is the detail given of Tyre's destruction.  We are told that material would be thrust into the water and even the dust scraped off. This is exactly what happened when Alexander used material from the mainland city to construct a causeway. This was to reach the other part of the city which was located on a rocky island about one half mile offshore. 

The project took Alexander seven months to accomplish.  He literally scraped the mainland city clean of material that it was left, indeed, like the top of a rock.  Today, in the location of ancient Tyre, fishermen spread their nets out just as the prophecy predicted.

26 Tyre was a tremendous trading city. Her influence and trading partners were all over the known world. Her wares are detailed extensively in Eze 26, - 28 She probably thought of herself as unassailable by Babylon – nevertheless she was brought low. :3

26:13 The ending of the songs and harps echoes the way that God had dealt with Jerusalem – Jer 7:34

26:18 The Isles ‘trembled’ at the demise of Tyre because she was such a powerful trading nation. She facilitated world trade in the days of Ezekiel. Her destruction would disrupt the flow of goods round the middle east at that time. In like manner the events around the time of the return of Jesus will throw the materialistic money making element of the world into total disarray

V.2 Tyre derided the fall of Jerusalem and boasted about herself at the same time.  This angered Yahweh.  Yahweh has a principle that precludes celebration over the demise of an enemy (Prov 24:17).

There is an interesting phrase in Eze 26:2 about Jerusalem: "she who was the gateway of the peoples". From this we have further evidence of the vital trade link that Israel was between Africa, Europe, Arabia, Asia and the North.

When looking on a map of the area it is hard to see why this would be the case, but if you look on a globe it becomes clear. A globe takes into account the curvature of the earth, and in doing this we see that the most direct land routes converge at the strip of coast occupied by Israel and Tyre. From this coast the ships of Tyre carried goods to Europe and the coasts of Africa. Whilst there is evidence that Tyre had a monopoly on shipping in the Mediteranean Sea, Israel controlled part of the land routes to their port.

So Tyre's glee at the destruction of Jerusalem was based mostly on greed. This same greed is what drives nations today to be constantly involved with Jerusalem, and may ultimately lead to "all nations gathered together against her" Zech 12:3

26:13,17 The language here speaking of the overthrow of Tyre is quoted in Revelation 17 and 18 to speak of the overthrow of ‘Babylon’ so we see that the ‘Babylon’ has the characteristics of Tyre as well as Babylon.

V.7 In 586 BC Nebuchadnezzar started his campaign against Tyre.  It lasted 13 years after which he accomplished little.  He did capture the main city and left it in ruins, but he could not touch the island city.  Nebuchadnezzar’s soldiers became old and weary in the Tyrian campaign (Eze 29:18).

26:5,14 Notice the twofold mention of ‘spreading of nets’. The first time was when the Babylonians overthrew Tyre. The second was when Tyre had been rebuilt on an island out in the sea was destroyed by the Greeks some three hundred years later.

The sinners, and the righteous one, were receiving the same rewards. Jesus was going to the grave in the same way as you and I would go to it. We justly, and he unjustly. In Galatians 3v10-13 Paul explains that anyone who falls in one part of the law, is cursed by it. Then he goes on to say that Jesus was also cursed by it, because it said "cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree". The thief made the point that they were all three under the same condemnation, but Jesus unjustly. Paul says Jesus had been unjustly cursed by the law.

God could not allow this to happen. If his only son, who perfectly kept the law in all points, was still cursed by it, then the law had to be removed! Jesus showed the law up as being imperfect, because he who WAS perfect was still condemned by it! Thus, Paul continues in his argument, the promise of everlasting life to the seed of Abraham was in effect nulified by that law (Gal 3v16-18). The law could not be allowed to nulify that promise, therefore the law had to go because a promise of God cannot go unfulfilled.

So the second thief got it exactly right. The only hope for him (who was justly condemned) was if he denied himself, and associated himself instead with the promised seed for whom the law would stand no more. This he did by his confession, and his simple request for mercy from Jesus. By showing the faith that he did, he showed that he no longer trusted in the law, but rather trusted in the promises which were stronger than the law, being given 430 years earlier (Gal 3:17).

V.43 is used by those who believe in heaven-going that the thief entered paradise on the day of his death (i.e. Today).  According to scripture, this could not be the case.  First, no-one has gone to heaven, God's dwelling place, except the Lord Jesus (John 1:18; 1Pet 3:22). 

In any event, the thief could not have entered heaven on that day and been with Jesus because Jesus was to lie in the grave for three days before ascending into heaven (Mark 8:31).  Besides, the reward to any accepted follower of Christ will be given on earth when He returns (1Cor 15:20-23). 

The confusion emanating from this verse lies in the English text.  The translators (from the original Greek) decided to place a comma after thee (KJV).  Since there are no commas in Greek, this placement was arbitrary.  If they had placed the comma after Today, then the whole sense would be altered.  The lesson here is to let scripture qualify scripture and not to rely upon one sole verse for understanding.

23:35-37  The threefold ‘If thou be Christ’ matches, in number, the threefold temptations in the wilderness. We are not necessarily to see a direct parallel between the two sets of three temptations. However we should realise that ‘The devil departed for a season’ Luke 4:13. Here is an occasion, one of many, when Jesus was sorely tempted.

23:23-24 So there must have been some of those who hailed Jesus when he entered Jerusalem – Luke 19:37-38 – amongst those crying for Jesus’ death. Human nature is easily deceived by peer pressure.

23:46 ‘into thy hands I commit my spirit’ quotes Psa 31:5. The remainder of the verse in the Psalm speaks of redemption. Maybe the rest of the words of the verse were on the lips of the lord on the resurrection morning.

V.1 The name Pontius Pilate indicates two things.  Pontius tells us that this Roman procurator was from the Roman family Ponti.  The appellation Pilate comes from the Latin pileatus which means wearing of the pileus.  The pileus was a cap or badge that indicated that the wearer was a freed slave.  This status might have applied to Pilate himself, or to an ancestor.  It is ironic that this man would crucify the one who would be able to set us free (Gal 5:1).

23:8-9 Jesus’ silence before Herod is not in the least surprising. Herod was not interested in the gospel message. He just wanted signs like the Jewish leaders. This is the sort of situation where ‘casting pearls before swine’ – Matt 7:6 - comes to mind.

Vs.8-11 The Herods were Edomites from the region of Idumea (the New Testament name for Edom).  Since the time of Esau (the father of Edom), Israelites and Edomites had been at odds.  And so it is not surprising that the Lord Jesus encountered trouble from the Herods. 

First, Herod the Great tried to have the infant Jesus murdered (Matt 2:13).  Then his son, Herod Antipas, apparently wanted to murder the adult Jesus (Luke 12:31).  (Perhaps this was an attempt by the Pharisees to have Jesus flee their midst?). 

In any event, Jesus had no respect for Herod Antipas, the fox (Luke 13:32).  Remember that it was Herod Antipas who murdered John Baptist (Matt 14:10).  Herod and Jesus did finally meet.  Herod's gladness at meeting Jesus soon turned to scorn.

But there is irony in the relationship between Jesus and Herod Antipas.  One of the material supporters of Jesus was Joanna, the wife of Chuza, who was Herod's steward (Luke 8:3).  Thus, it would have been Herod, the murderous fox, who indirectly (and unknowingly) supported Jesus materially.

23:20-22  Pilate has by now had the message from his wife – Matt 27:19– and his own investigations had established that Jesus’ antagonists had not made a case against him. But he has not the strength of leadership to bring his decision to fruition